PDA

View Full Version : No more fast breaks...ever....really. I'm begging.



Naptown_Seth
12-03-2006, 01:59 AM
Okay, has it begun to sink in that this team can not run a good break with any level of quality, at least on a consistant basis? They were this way the last 2 years and it's not changed.

They have been blowing all sorts of mismatch breakaways. 2 on 1s that end up as misses, charges, balls off of fingertips....

I realize that Jack was apparently hurt on that last play for him when he just ended up with nowhere to go and gave up on it (or couldn't move because of the knee perhaps), but honestly that was par for course with this team and fast breaks.


I get it, they can't do it. Stop trying and focus on doing what you can do well. I've been all for early offense, getting down into the half court quickly. But please just stop pretending that somehow there is going to be this great long outlet pass that leads to some touch passes between 2 guys till one flies in for the dunk ala Worthy or Jordan.

It ain't happening - ever. It's okay, it's not the Pacers' thing. I'm not mad that they can't do it. I'm mad that they can't do it but keep trying to force it to happen.



Okay, sometimes they do get them. I just don't consider 15% or whatever their conversion rate on fast break attempts is to be a quality scoring rate, especially when it seems like those 85% end up coming back the other way for easy scores by the opponent.

Kestas
12-03-2006, 08:38 AM
Aren't fastbreaks an integral parto fo the success in the modern basketball? I doubt any team can be really good without playing fastbreaks when they present themselves. and if, for some freakish reason, a team can not convert fastbreaks, then it hardly deserves to be called a proffesional basketball unit. and I somewhat doubt Pacers are such a team ;) imho there are no easier ways to score points than on a fastbreak.

Putnam
12-03-2006, 08:45 AM
Seth, you are raving.

You only have to go back one game to Seattle, where the Pacers had an advantage on fast break points.

The Pacers must get better at fast breaking and fast ball movement. However long it takes, and whoever it takes to get the job done, player-wise and coach-wise.

It ain't happening now, but nothing good is going to happen for this team until they learn.

Unclebuck
12-03-2006, 09:57 AM
On the telecast last night Chris mentioned a stat that has me very concerned. I think he said the Pacers are dead last in giving up points in transition or maybe the exact stat is points on a fastbreak. (meaning the Pacers give up the most points in this category) But if that is the case, then we have to do whatever it takes to correct that. If that means we abandon offensive rebounds, if that means we go back to a walk it up style - I don't care, but being last in the league in this stat - is a losing situation.

Hicks
12-03-2006, 10:23 AM
If you want to stop giving up fast breaks, get MORE offensive rebounds, not less.

D-BONE
12-03-2006, 10:23 AM
On the telecast last night Chris mentioned a stat that has me very concerned. I think he said the Pacers are dead last in giving up points in transition or maybe the exact stat is points on a fastbreak. (meaning the Pacers give up the most points in this category) But if that is the case, then we have to do whatever it takes to correct that. If that means we abandon offensive rebounds, if that means we go back to a walk it up style - I don't care, but being last in the league in this stat - is a losing situation.

If this is the case, then the irony is just too thick. Try to implement a more up-tempo offensive attack only to become a sieve defending in transition.

The bottom line is that we have not been a particularly good defensive team period outside of JO's shotblocking and some occasional flahses of good individual defense. It would seem we have enough pieces to put a halfway decent defensive team on the floor with most combinations we could play.

While I agree that our attempt at a faster pace on O is not playing out all too well, we also commit a lot of TOs in our halfcourt, too. Just seems like tons of bad decisions, lapses in concentration, and just general carlessness. What was the differential in the Denver game? Weren't we like -16 with 26 TOs or something? And Tins only had 2 I think as the primary ball handler and Jackson had only 2.

We're almost a quarter in, how are you guys feeling about our "new" direction and the team's development? How long is long enough as far as time to gel? Half a season? Will the D improve and the turnovers at least be reduced to a reasonable amount?

In general I will say I am content with the energy on the floor and the apparent cameraderie amongst the players. Beyond that, it still looks like a .500ish team to me, which is approximately what I was expecting. However that does indicate to me that, barring a major upswing in the W column over the next 20-25 games, TPTB should be seriously contemplating an aggressive plan for further change of team composition.

BlueNGold
12-03-2006, 10:41 AM
The problem is, we are attempting to play a style of game that the western conference plays better. ...at least some of the teams. Just wait until we play Dallas or Phoenix.

Quis
12-03-2006, 10:47 AM
Pacers are 28th in FG%. Ouch. That has to change.

NPFII
12-03-2006, 10:50 AM
Until the Pacers get rid of Carlisle, Tinsley, Jackson, Al (& maybe Daniels & Harrison) - they will be a horrible team to watch.

The sheer talent of these guys may win some games up to ~.500, but it will be painful and frustrating for the fans, and they will ALWAYS crumble when it will matter, like in playoff time.

This team needs a new look, a new image, a new style, and a little... not much... a little will be enough... brains. The sad truth is that dumb & selfish players will get you nowhere. That translates to:

Trade Jax, Tins, Al - for whatever you can get (jury's still out on Daniels, Harrison)
Dump Rick - and put Bird, or a guy with "character" at the helm.


Free us from these unwatchable excuses of basketball players and give us a basketball TEAM!!!

speakout4
12-03-2006, 11:02 AM
The problem is, we are attempting to play a style of game that the western conference plays better. ...at least some of the teams. Just wait until we play Dallas or Phoenix.

The go-to guys are not fast break players while the subs may be but are not talented enough. So far I haven't seen anything special from Marshall or Powell that makes me think they will be on the team next year and Baston has no potential what so ever given a dunk now and then.
Forget the fast break and go for the rebound. The other teams get really easy uncontested rebounds because no one is covering.

Unclebuck
12-03-2006, 11:18 AM
If you want to stop giving up fast breaks, get MORE offensive rebounds, not less.

The Pacers are the 8th best offensive rebounding team in the NBA right now. The Pacers are going to the offensive boards more often and I see less of an emphasis on getting back on defense.

Hicks, certainly the more offensive rebounds a team gets the fewer fastbreaks a team will give up. Wait that is not necessarily true or necessarily false. If a team would decide to send all 5 guys to the offensive board - they would really get a ton of offensive rebounds- but give up a ton of fastbreak layups - uncontested. But of course no team does that, some teams send two guys some teams send 1, some teams might send 2 plus one depending on where they are on the floor.

So Hicks I don't agree with your statement (it isn't that easy), but the bigger question is how a team goes about getting the offensive boards. If the Pacers are running the fastbreak well and running their halfcourt offense well, with good floor balance and the Pacers are taking good shots, then yes they can get some offensive rebs and still have a chance to get back on defense.

So I will grant you that the number of offensive rebs won't or shouldn't reflect on how many fastbreak points are given up - you can do both or you can do neither.

speakout4
12-03-2006, 11:44 AM
The Pacers are the 8th best offensive rebounding team in the NBA right now. The Pacers are going to the offensive boards more often and I see less of an emphasis on getting back on defense.

Hicks, certainly the more offensive rebounds a team gets the fewer fastbreaks a team will give up. Wait that is not necessarily true or necessarily false. If a team would decide to send all 5 guys to the offensive board - they would really get a ton of offensive rebounds- but give up a ton of fastbreak layups - uncontested. But of course no team does that, some teams send two guys some teams send 1, some teams might send 2 plus one depending on where they are on the floor.

So Hicks I don't agree with your statement (it isn't that easy), but the bigger question is how a team goes about getting the offensive boards. If the Pacers are running the fastbreak well and running their halfcourt offense well, with good floor balance and the Pacers are taking good shots, then yes they can get some offensive rebs and still have a chance to get back on defense.

So I will grant you that the number of offensive rebs won't or shouldn't reflect on how many fastbreak points are given up - you can do both or you can do neither.

A great deal depends upon whether the opposing team is a fast break team or not. I am surprised that the Pacers are 8th in offensive rebounds but against a fast break team they should be going for the offensive rebound to prevent the fast break.

I have often seen no Pacer going for the rebound period to prevent the fast break. The statistic I would be interested in is whether other teams are getting more rebounds against the Pacers than they normally do.

Unclebuck
12-03-2006, 12:17 PM
but against a fast break team they should be going for the offensive rebound to prevent the fast break.



That just isn't a sound strategy and it won't work as you intend it to. But I need to ask what you mean. Do you mean you want the Pacers to commit more guys to go to the offensive boards - I know that won't work, but if you are talking about an overall strategy of good shot selection, floor balance, and sending 1 or 2 guys to the offensive board really hard - then it can be a successful strategy overall.

speakout4
12-03-2006, 12:38 PM
That just isn't a sound strategy and it won't work as you intend it to. But I need to ask what you mean. Do you mean you want the Pacers to commit more guys to go to the offensive boards - I know that won't work, but if you are talking about an overall strategy of good shot selection, floor balance, and sending 1 or 2 guys to the offensive board really hard - then it can be a successful strategy overall.
There are times I see a shot put up and no one is going for the offensive rebound. That is not balance but poor strategy. Again the stat I would like to see is whether some teams rebound better against the pacers than they normally do.
JO and Tinsley are just not fast break kind of guys. JO is too big and Tinsley just doesn't have that kind of stamina IMO.

Putnam
12-03-2006, 01:05 PM
The statistic I would be interested in is whether other teams are getting more rebounds against the Pacers than they normally do.

In the agregate, the Pacers are getting 42.5 rebounds per game, and allowing opponents 43.2.


Teams that got more rebounds v. the Pacers than their season average, and how the Pacers fared:


Boston +11 (L)
Porland +10 (W)
Chicago +10 (L)
New Orleans +9 (L)
Milwaukee +6 (W)
Golden State +5 (W)
Charlotte +5 (W)


Teams that got fewer rebounds against the Pacers than their average:

New York -3 (W)
Denver -4 (L)
Orlando -8 (W)
Philadelphia -8 (W)

The other teams were within 1-2 of their average against the Pacers.

The Pacers have been blown out three times this season.

Against Washington, turnovers and poor shooting killed the Pacers. They got 10 more rebounds that the Wizards. Against Boston, the Pacers shot lousy, and didn't give themselves enough opportunities for second chance points because of poor rebounding (53-33). Against Denver, the Pacers shot almost the same FG%, and outrebounded the opponent 54-41. The story against Denver was turnovers, free throws and Denver scoring 11 3s.

speakout4
12-03-2006, 01:34 PM
In the agregate, the Pacers are getting 42.5 rebounds per game, and allowing opponents 43.2.


Teams that got more rebounds v. the Pacers than their season average, and how the Pacers fared:


Boston +11 (L)
Porland +10 (W)
Chicago +10 (L)
New Orleans +9 (L)
Milwaukee +6 (W)
Golden State +5 (W)
Charlotte +5 (W)


Teams that got fewer rebounds against the Pacers than their average:

New York -3 (W)
Denver -4 (L)
Orlando -8 (W)
Philadelphia -8 (W)

The other teams were within 1-2 of their average against the Pacers.

The Pacers have been blown out three times this season.

Against Washington, turnovers and poor shooting killed the Pacers. They got 10 more rebounds that the Wizards. Against Boston, the Pacers shot lousy, and didn't give themselves enough opportunities for second chance points because of poor rebounding (53-33). Against Denver, the Pacers shot almost the same FG%, and outrebounded the opponent 54-41. The story against Denver was turnovers, free throws and Denver scoring 11 3s.
Thank you. That is excellent research and although the Pacers won a number of these games letting teams get 10-11 rebounds more than they average is a problem. Most of these are not the elite teams the Pacers will be facing in the playoffs.

Arcadian
12-03-2006, 02:10 PM
JO is a half court player as opposed to front court players like Marion, Amare and Dirk. I don't think that is a bad thing either. Overall I think our personel stands out being bigger and stronger at the perimeter. We aren't fast or particularly good shooters.

Naptown_Seth
12-03-2006, 05:40 PM
Seth, you are raving.

You only have to go back one game to Seattle, where the Pacers had an advantage on fast break points.

The Pacers must get better at fast breaking and fast ball movement. However long it takes, and whoever it takes to get the job done, player-wise and coach-wise.

It ain't happening now, but nothing good is going to happen for this team until they learn.
There are fast break points where a guy is ahead of the pack because of a steal or a bad pass.

I'm talking about a long rebound and you have SOME defense back. The Pacers blow those chances more than any team I can recall. I'm talking about situations that should be dunks or at the very least a foul on the miss, and the Pacers come away with a shot that doesn't even hit the rim.

Sometimes they do get scores out of them but even those are awkward and perhaps a bit lucky. For example, just a couple of games ago they had a break that ended with the ball bouncing between a bunch of hands, was almost stolen, almost went out of bounds, and then ended up with Tinsley who did a 2 foot baby hook thing.

Sorry, but a 3 on 2 RUNNING break is not supposed to end that way ever. That's wrong. You don't win games by patting yourself on the back when you do it wrong and catch a good bounce.


I hate to have to pull video on this to make the case, but I suppose I will have to I guess. I can't believe people watch these games (forget the box score "TO points" or "break points" because those don't show execution or how many were defended) and don't see these endless string of blown fast breaks.

IMO you should NEVER come away from a full speed 2 on 1 without points. The Pacers may have done this every single game this year at least once. I'm not positive, but it's been extremely common. In several games it's happened more than once.


On top of all this, it's a problem that I was complaining about 2 seasons ago. It's not a new issue. Last year they had the same thing happening over and over, and I recall a few posters at least agreeing that the Pacers had no FINISHER for these breaks...and that's what I'm getting at. Bad spacing, few real finishers, lots of ball fumbling, late/bad passes, empty trips with a man or 2 advantage and the defense running backward.

And how about a follower to DUNK those misses. How many times have you seen those chances go empty this year. It JUST HAPPENED last night vs DEN. All the defenders are moving to the baseline due to the speed of the play, leaving things wide open for a trailer to come behind and dunk it...but no one was there.



The Pacers must get better at fast breaking and fast ball movement. However long it takes, and whoever it takes to get the job done, player-wise and coach-wise.It's been 3 years. It is not happening. They have made ZERO progress this season. I didn't post this 3 weeks ago. Now enough is enough.

Running means you are going to give stuff up the other way. Okay...as long as you can convert your transitions. The Pacers are terrible at it. Defended breakaways are a DISASTER. Not problematic, not a little off right now. They are losing situations for the team and really hurting them.


I'm not saying walk it up. I'm saying that I'd rather see them set up a HC set in order to avoid giving up something running back the other way if they are going to score defended breaks no better than a regular HC set, and that's the reality of it for them.

Naptown_Seth
12-03-2006, 05:52 PM
1st quarter, 9:50 left

Tinsley tips an entry pass meant for Melo at the rim (oop chance). At this point the Pacers have 4 PLAYERS ahead to the Nuggets 2 (to start the break). The Nuggets react better and turn it into a 4 on 4 race with Tinsley leading the dribble after Foster collected the pass Tins tipped and fed it back to him.

You have Jack wide left. Foster and JO are side by side in the middle lane trailing Tins (bad spacing).

Miller runs ahead and turns Tins at the arc, Tins feeds Jack on the wing and he is able to get past Naj. easily since he had to run and quickly turn to defend (and is slower anyway).

JO and Foster are slowing down and are right next to Tins. This allows Camby and Smith to catch up and space for a possible rebound. Still Jackson has an open layup ahead of all 4 DEN players (Melo was left behind because he was at the baseline when the break started).

Jack misses the layup. Foster is able to sneak between Smith and Miller to challenge Camby for the rebound. The ball hits the rim and comes to Foster, but instead of a dunk putback (which you know Camby would have done) he tips it off the back of the rim and Denver gets an uncontested rebound. Jeff gets an "offensive rebound" which does NOTHING for the Pacers (a prime example of why I ranted about Jeff in the post-game thread, it happened nearly all night with him).


This is a good, but not worst case by any stretch, example of what my complaint is. If you watch games and don't see this stuff then I don't know what to tell you. It happens all the time and it's a real problem. Better to just set up JO in the block if you can't make 2 layups on a break with the defense scrambling.


EDIT - the PxP doesn't show Jeff with an O-REB on this play, I had assumed it was in the count. I'm going through the PxP to see if it matches the box totals, because sometimes they don't. Its still bad for Jeff to miss this, but I wouldn't want to misrepresent it in his stats. Trying to be fair.

Naptown_Seth
12-03-2006, 06:13 PM
Oh yeah, that Seattle game where they had an "advantage"...no problem.

1st quarter, 9:58 to go

JO gets a defensive board and with the play being at the rim you have 3 Seattle players on the baseline "below" JO and Jeff (if up is the Pacers offensive end, which is how I look at break spacings).

Tins is out ahead with Luke. Tins is a half step ahead of Luke at HC and Luke is a few feet to the side while Tins is dead-center on the court, ie he is in "front" of everyone else at this point. JO hits him with a good outlet to get this situation.

Wilcox starts this play right next to Jeff, above him by 1 step. The Pacers are starting ahead of each of their guys on a man to man basis. Just every Pacer running if his SEA counterpart runs gives the Pacers numbers at the other rim, expect Jeff being even with Wilcox.

On the dribble Tinsley has to slow down, Luke cuts him off but is still backpeddling and Tins goes behind the back so he can pass Luke on the right for a layup chance.

Tins pulls up which leaves Luke falling out of the play into the baseline. Open baby jump/layup for Tins...but here comes Wilcox now a full 4-5 steps ahead of Foster. Wilcox BLOCKS the shot, it goes into the rim/backboard and into Luke's hands, Foster is never involved in the play.

Sonics get the ball and you see Collison coming into the play. Not JO, not Al.

And STILL the Sonics are able to break on this. Luke naturally gets ahead of Tins because Tinsley was headed upcourt when his shot was blocked while Luke had already started going the other way when he caught the rebound.

Still Wilcox and Collison are behind the play leaving JO, Al and Jack to defend. Jack cuts off Luke, then follows the pass over to Ray (Jack helped on Tins' man, then went back to his man).

Ray shows an up-fake and drives by Jack as he tries to close out (which is what happens when you are forced to close out on shooters that can drive). JO comes to help on Ray, fine, so Ray dishes it to...

Wilcox, who is now 4-5 steps ahead of Foster coming back the other way. Wilcox goes for the dunk and is fouled by Tinsley (misses dunk as ball comes out). He makes both FTs. 0 points for Indy on the break, 2 given up.



Again, I like Foster and I like him starting. I didn't pick either of these because of him. I literally FFWD into both games till the first Pacers break. Both were misses, both happened to involved Jeff. But they also featured Tins and Jack not getting scores or fouls on their shots, as well as no JO or Al for whatever reasons.

The point isn't to trash Jeff here, or Tins and Jack. The point is to make clear examples of what I mean when I say "no more fast breaks because you aren't any good at them". They aren't.

If it's Melo instead of Jack it's a dunk, not a layup miss. If it's Camby it's a dunk follow-up, not a weak one handed tip miss. If it's Luke instead of Tinsley it's a foul or a dish to Foster who could have easily dunked behind the aggressive Wilcox going for the block.

But it's not those players in the BnG. The guys this team has just don't do this sort of thing well, they don't score well in transition traffic.

rabid
12-03-2006, 07:27 PM
I attended the Golden State game last Wednesday in person (didn't post a game report, since by the time I got back home from Oakland it was pretty late and everyone else had summed up most of my thoughts on the game).

Everyone in the group I attended with noticed the fast break problem. As others have mentioned, there was a clear lack of spacing and no real finisher on what seemed like practically every fast break.

You'd see three Pacers all ahead of defenders, but they'd be crowding the same side of the floor, trying to figure out on the fly who was the decoy and who was the finisher.

Or you'd have a guard (such as Tinsley) who'd run the break so fast that no other players could catch up (or maybe the other players were just too slow to run), and then the player with the ball would either have to stop and wait for teammates to catch up (allowing the defense to get set) or would go ahead and take a pull-up jumper or contested layup against the one or two defenders who'd gotten back - and miss the shot, with the Warriors getting the rebound.

I swear this happened over and over again throughout the game, to the point where we were groaning halfway through every Pacers fast break. Without looking at the stats, I'm guessing we ran 7 or 8 fast breaks on turnovers and converted maybe one or two the whole night.

It's almost as if the players haven't PRACTICED the fast break enough or else don't have any sort of fast break "plays" set up. Guys are trying to pass/run up the court but they don't know where they're supposed to be or who is doing what until it's too late and the defense has set.

I feel like the solution is better coaching and more practice of this situation. The other elements are already there - we're often able to cause turnovers and get the ball up the floor very quickly. That's 2/3 of the battle right there. The missing piece is executing the break properly so an open guy has the ball in scoring position at the right time (i.e. with defenders out of the way).

At the moment, things look very out-of-sync. Hopefully it's because most of these players still have only played 15 or 20 games together...

bulldog
12-03-2006, 08:10 PM
Just like to point out that NBA teams don't actually, um, practice. Not really anyway, not like a college team might.

They have to figure these things out as they go. I'm really down on this year's team, but this is one aspect I do think we'll get better at. We have guys who can pass, guys who can finish, just gotta get comfortable and put it all together.

ALF68
12-04-2006, 04:02 PM
Okay, has it begun to sink in that this team can not run a good break with any level of quality, at least on a consistant basis? They were this way the last 2 years and it's not changed.

They have been blowing all sorts of mismatch breakaways. 2 on 1s that end up as misses, charges, balls off of fingertips....

I realize that Jack was apparently hurt on that last play for him when he just ended up with nowhere to go and gave up on it (or couldn't move because of the knee perhaps), but honestly that was par for course with this team and fast breaks.


I get it, they can't do it. Stop trying and focus on doing what you can do well. I've been all for early offense, getting down into the half court quickly. But please just stop pretending that somehow there is going to be this great long outlet pass that leads to some touch passes between 2 guys till one flies in for the dunk ala Worthy or Jordan.

It ain't happening - ever. It's okay, it's not the Pacers' thing. I'm not mad that they can't do it. I'm mad that they can't do it but keep trying to force it to happen.



Okay, sometimes they do get them. I just don't consider 15% or whatever their conversion rate on fast break attempts is to be a quality scoring rate, especially when it seems like those 85% end up coming back the other way for easy scores by the opponent.
I thought that you were the one leading the charge for a more atheltic team so that they could play an uptempo game.

Naptown_Seth
12-05-2006, 03:34 AM
Bulldog, like I said, it's been a problem before this year. There was hope that the new guys might fix that, but only Rawle and Baston look like guys that do this part of the game well...and James White who is gone and wouldn't have been on the court anyway.

JO, Tins, Jack, Foster have never been great with the spacing. Foster can run the floor and throw it down, though he's looking a little slower this year. Daniels is not any more of a flier than Jack is. Al isn't either.

Granger hasn't really shown great knowledge for these situations either, and as I pointed out elsewhere discussing his desire to shoot outside he often runs to the arc on breaks ala Reggie Miller. I'd rather see him trying to be more like Pippen on breaks.

I just don't see it getting better because if it was then I would have seen it last year. It's been bugging me for a couple of seasons and I used to post about it in Star game threads every other week it seemed. It's been so ugly this year I just blew a gasket about it. I can't stands no more...:D


BTW, if you saw the LAL game tonight it featured a lot more of these duds. They had far better finishes at the rim from HC plays than anything they got out of breaks.

Putnam
12-05-2006, 09:39 AM
Seth, thanks for the detailed descriptions you posted in #19 and #20 above. Your photos and play analysis is always apprecfiated., and you make the argument strongly that the Pacers are poor at pushing the ball upcourt.

I just want to ask, why do you recommend giving up rather than redoubling the effort to develop this side of the game. I recognize that the latter course could mean personnel changes and probably won't be achieved this season. But isn't speed an essential part of the game?

naptownmenace
12-05-2006, 11:37 AM
Bulldog, like I said, it's been a problem before this year. There was hope that the new guys might fix that, but only Rawle and Baston look like guys that do this part of the game well...and James White who is gone and wouldn't have been on the court anyway.

I agree. I know it might seem like piling on a guy I don't like, meh... I really don't care, Tinsley has horrible judgement when it comes to fastbreaks. I'm especially talking about situations when he pushes the break with his dribble (he's pretty good at making the long outlet pass). He holds onto the ball too long, giving it up too late or not at all.

Saras and DA are really pretty good at running the break but nothing special compared to guys like Nash, Andre Miller, Hinrich, TJ Ford, or Jason Kidd. That's why I think the Pacers won't excell in an uptempo offense - they need a PG with better decision-making skills. I'm sure someone will disagree but Anthony Johnson is better than Tinsley in passing out of the fastbreak offense.

Naptown_Seth
12-07-2006, 02:52 AM
Seth, thanks for the detailed descriptions you posted in #19 and #20 above. Your photos and play analysis is always apprecfiated., and you make the argument strongly that the Pacers are poor at pushing the ball upcourt.

I just want to ask, why do you recommend giving up rather than redoubling the effort to develop this side of the game. I recognize that the latter course could mean personnel changes and probably won't be achieved this season. But isn't speed an essential part of the game?
Why? Because they are MUCH better at it. I think tonight vs Orlando you saw that. They only had perhaps one or 2 decent breaks, with a couple of others turning into those same old awkward bunny jumps and stuff. I like the points when they get them, but when they miss it almost always leads to a score the other way.

What they did well tonight was to get into some early offense sets, like a PnR just as the defense is getting set and finding matchups. Say at the 18-19 mark. One PnR they just ran before ORL had their footing and they were by them with a return pass and score just like that.


SARAS is great in transition, and I think he was part of all the good ones. The only non-Saras that was decent was the somewhat awkward pass to a trailing Foster for the dunk. And even that play proves my point because when was the last time you saw a "trailer" on any of these breaks? It's so rare it stands out.

Anyway, point being that while Saras can run, he's also strong in HC. Tinsley is also a stong HC passer, but a little too careless and sometimes awkward on breaks. Al is a great mismatch in the HC with his outside shot. JO is outstanding at drawing doubles (even triples tonight) and contrary to JO haters' opinions, he's becoming a really solid passer from the post (we've seen some pretty clever bounce passes in traffic from him lately even).

Jack is by far a better HC guy, especially if you can drive him baseline on a GnG or ISO. Foster can run, but he's a extra possession type rebounder that does the most damage when he has time to setup his position. Daniels is like Jack, he's even less likely to fly in for a dunk and he's not that great a pure layup guy (which shows when he drives to the cup I think). He's better getting himself a short jumper off the dribble.


What it all adds up to IMO is that the team has a LOT of strong HC talent, which also tends to help ease the defensive load created by lots of transition. So you accept what you are and try to be the very best version of that you can.

On most nights I think the Pacers hold several advantages in HC style pairings, but almost no advantages in transition game style play. You want to play on your terms and emphasize those advantages.

Arroyo would rather have been 1 on 1 on breaks vs Tinsley than having to go PnR only to find JO or Baston waiting inside on him. But at the other end Arroyo's defensive speed had very limited impact on defending the HC game.


So I still like EARLY offense, moving the ball up quickly and getting into a set. I'm not against a great outlet that leads to a break score, but I would back off pushing this as a main goal.

Honestly IMO Rick already has taken his foot off the peddle and that's where we started seeing some signs of improved play (barring the LA game and the 2nd half of the DEN game).


Everyone is so sure that the game is going to be this high-flying game, but I don't buy it completely. Some of that is hype. There is always room for HC play and fundamentals rather than trying to run out for free scores on every rebound. Just 2 years ago people were even saying that it was this loose style that was going to PREVENT the Suns from winning a title.

I look out West and see the HC Spurs and the early offense but HC oriented Mavs tearing it up, along with the Triangle in LA. And Sloan's Jazz? No, he's not a fun and gun coach either, despite their higher scoring. Van Gundy's Rockets? Please, Jeff is as HC slog as it gets, even with T-Mac on the team.

I think someone pulled a fast one on the East and talked them into believing that fastbreaks were the style of the future, but most of the best teams out West don't even buy that or play that way.

Naptown_Seth
12-09-2006, 05:51 PM
Fair is fair, in the 2nd half of the Portland game the team pulled off a slew of quality breaks.

A majority of these featured Tinsley making great passes or moves. One was the behind the back in traffic to make the layup, another was a late dish to the trailing Baston for a dunk.

Jack and Baston were also quality factors in these breaks. Baston spaced well on a couple of them, as did Jack (or Baston helped make it look that way). Jack had one that was good but not great when Dixon lunged for the steal and got crossed quickly without slowing Jack down at all. Bad defense, but credit Jack for playing it correctly and keeping the easy score on track.

And I'm not counting the stuff like where Jack was ahead of the pack because I've never said they couldn't make plays that are uncontested. I'm talking about having to make moves or passes to score around or over 1 or more transition defenders. Also not counting the couple of times they broke down a full court press because that's also been fine most of the year, and was again last night.


Probably anyone around here who had read this thread and watched the 2nd half last night was thinking "um, what do you call this". I call it UNUSUAL, but very nice.

If I'd been seeing this stuff the last 2+ years on a regular basis I never would have started this thread. Maybe it was Portland too, but typically weaker teams haven't made it look better in the past.

Anyway, I sure hope its here to stay. I like it as a SUPPLEMENT to good HC offense. Finally some layups and dunks off of breaks.

Naptown_Seth
12-27-2006, 06:01 AM
Bump for the Houston game. Nuff said I think. This was an unfortunate display of exactly what I've been complaining about with almost all of their breaks turned away with missed shots, fumbles, etc.

Seems like about the only breaks they score on are when it's truly an uncontested one (like 1 guy out in front of everyone).

Either practice this stuff or don't even bother. That is especially true for Jackson who seems to be the king of botched breaks

bellisimo
12-27-2006, 09:15 AM
Bump for the Houston game. Nuff said I think. This was an unfortunate display of exactly what I've been complaining about with almost all of their breaks turned away with missed shots, fumbles, etc.

Seems like about the only breaks they score on are when it's truly an uncontested one (like 1 guy out in front of everyone).

Either practice this stuff or don't even bother. That is especially true for Jackson who seems to be the king of botched breaks


they definitely need to do some drills...you can put Nash or Kidd with these guys and they'll still make a mess out of all these fast breaks...

BruceLeeroy
12-27-2006, 12:52 PM
I don't enjoy bashing Jack but he is by far the worst gaurd I've ever seen at delivering a pass or finishing on a fastbreak.

Wouldn't it be nice to have a 2 gaurd that played like one?

Naptown_Seth
03-03-2007, 12:25 PM
Okay, the trade has proven my point on this issue and I have to give credit when it is clearly due.

DUNLEAVY RUNS A GREAT BREAK, and so does Murphy. Since the trade this is one area that looks remarkably better. I'm not thrilled with much of Dun's game, mostly due to his shooting and defense, but GD does the guy run a nice break.

The 5th basket vs PHX last night came off a contested break, exactly the situation I was complaining about in early DEC.

Why? DUN led the break up the middle with a defender packpeddling in front of him. Granger was right coming from the 3/4 angle (ie, just off the right elbow coming from the arc - not all that wide really).

Tins was out far wide left and slowing for the 3/play setup if needed. This is actually a nice spacing move as long as only one non-dunking type is doing it and you have guys going to the rim like this.

So this could be a wreck still, Danny isn't really ahead and it could turn into Dun forcing a layup (like AJ or Al would have done) through the defender, or Danny's man being able to cut the passing lane off.

But DunDun slows up which pulls his man from dropping to the rim and creates a vertical angle to Danny, rather than just a left to right pass (going from sideline to sideline direction). His lookaway bounce pass goes right between the defenders to Danny's hands at full speed, who gets a solid layup despite 2 PHX defenders there.

They contest his shot, but both are on their heels and in weak defensive positions all because of how Dun ran the break, when he passed and how he improved the spacing.


And as I did when I started this thread, I didn't just see this one thing and say something. In fact I intended to bump this the other day after seeing Dun and Murph work off each other for an easy break score.

It's a bit ironic that the team was seen to get slower and less athletic in the trade, but has become a dramatically better break team. I've said it in post-game threads, but not here of course, that I'm ready for them to go back to trying to run more simply because I think it takes the best advantage of stuff Dunleavy does very well.

He plays and spaces smart. And it would seem that the less he has time to think about maybe missing a shot, the better he scores and plays.


So edit the title now to "More fast breaks. I'm begging." :D

bnd45
03-03-2007, 03:15 PM
As long as Dunleavy is allowed to catch a few outlet passes, our # of easy buckets would go up. So many times we waste break chances because Tinsley isn't in a good spot to receive the outlet.

Naptown_Seth
03-04-2007, 06:59 PM
As long as Dunleavy is allowed to catch a few outlet passes, our # of easy buckets would go up. So many times we waste break chances because Tinsley isn't in a good spot to receive the outlet.
I wish it were just that, but Tins is also spotty on spacing the end of the breaks even if he starts with good position (due to a steal for example).

I never have understood why people saw Tins as a running type of PG. He's a HC PG. He might like it up-tempo and with lots of motion, rather than leveraging the low post to create situations, but he has always run the HC much better than the break.

And I've always been pleased with that to be honest. His aggressive HC play reminded me of Jax. Too many bad risks, but otherwise similar.

Unclebuck
03-04-2007, 07:54 PM
Dunleavy is an excellent finisher on the fastbreak and he's pretty good as the trigger man also. That is one area where he's much better than Jackson

Naptown_Seth
11-18-2007, 02:20 PM
Big time bump for the best fast break I've seen out of the Pacers since I can't remember even.

Baseline to baseline (well okay JO got the ball at the charge circle, but still), NO DRIBBLE, 2 passes, flying in dunk by Shawne. JO-Tins(2 steps and pass)-Shawne 1.5 steps on a full run and up for the Pippen-Jordan caliber breakaway from the wing dunk.

God bless the Pacers simply for giving me that moment of joy that I've been needing so badly from this team.

I may criticize, but I also give credit.

Evan_The_Dude
11-18-2007, 02:28 PM
Brought tears of joy to my eyes. I know Jim ran some practice drills where they would get up and down the court without the ball ever hitting the floor. It's nice to finally see it in action. You know what that left me wanting?

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/moar-moar-moar.jpg

FlavaDave
11-18-2007, 02:38 PM
Brought tears of joy to my eyes. I know Jim ran some practice drills where they would get up and down the court without the ball ever hitting the floor. It's nice to finally see it in action. You know what that left me wanting?

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/moar-moar-moar.jpg



Hey, I got sig quoted! Thanks man!


Oh, and I wish I saw this. Stupid job.

Evan_The_Dude
11-18-2007, 02:51 PM
Oh, and I wish I saw this. Stupid job.

Click play under watch highlights. You can't miss the play.

http://www.nba.com/games/20071117/UTAIND/gameinfo.html?nav=scoreboardhome

MagicRat
11-19-2007, 06:18 PM
You can see it here, also.....
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/M_1df4U2qpQ&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/M_1df4U2qpQ&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

MyFavMartin
11-19-2007, 06:49 PM
We could just make some more shots. :D

Infinite MAN_force
11-20-2007, 01:50 AM
that little highlight reel there really showcased Tinsley, he made some great plays in there... he deserves more credit than he gets.

rexnom
11-20-2007, 03:15 AM
Oh dear lord that play to Murphy was just gorgeous.

avoidingtheclowns
11-20-2007, 10:19 AM
Oh dear lord that play to Murphy was just gorgeous.

it was... murphy is fine when moving without the ball.

but when he decides to put the ball on the floor -- then barrels inside the arc/lane like the boulder in Raiders of the Lost Ark -- it turns ugly.

oh and i'm in love with the team in that YouTube clip. still some careless mistakes but tinsley orchestrated the offense beautifully. now that we know we're capable of playing that way against a talented team, the goal is to find some type of consistency. lets hope that begins against the lakers.

Putnam
11-20-2007, 12:10 PM
This unfortunate thread no longer applies to the Pacers. Under coach O'Brien, they can score on fast break, and when they run they tend to do better all around.

Just for fun, I'd like to point to this link at 82games:


http://www.82games.com/clockx.htm


...which shows that even under Carlisle in the 04-05 season, the Pacers scored better when they shot early than they they held the ball.

The cry to stop using the fast break has never made sense.

Arcadian
11-20-2007, 12:55 PM
You can see it here, also.....


Jay was right. How many of those shots would have been allowed/called under the prior coach.